Celestia excels at providing a neutral, high-throughput DA layer for sovereign rollups because it pioneered the modular stack with a minimal, purpose-built blockchain. Its design focuses solely on ordering and guaranteeing data availability, enabling rollups like Arbitrum Orbit, Eclipse, and Polygon CDK to post data at a low cost. For example, Celestia's mainnet beta consistently processes over 100 MB of data per block, translating to a theoretical throughput of thousands of TPS for rollups, with fees often under $0.01 per transaction.
LABS
Comparisons
Celestia vs EigenDA: Modular DAO Data Availability
A technical comparison for CTOs and protocol architects evaluating data availability layers to minimize costs and enable scalable, sovereign app-chains with efficient on-chain governance.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for Modular Data Availability
A data-driven comparison of Celestia and EigenDA, the two leading contenders redefining data availability for modular blockchains.
EigenDA takes a different approach by building a data availability service as an actively validated service (AVS) on top of Ethereum, secured by restaked ETH via EigenLayer. This results in a trade-off: it inherits Ethereum's robust economic security and deep ecosystem integration but introduces a dependency on Ethereum's consensus layer and a more complex cryptoeconomic model. Its architecture is optimized for high-volume, low-cost data posting for rollups already operating within the Ethereum ecosystem, such as those using the OP Stack or Arbitrum Nitro.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum sovereignty, minimal cost, and a blockchain-agnostic foundation for your rollup, choose Celestia. If you prioritize leveraging Ethereum's established security budget and seamless integration with its L2 tooling and liquidity, choose EigenDA.
tldr-summary
Modular DA Battlefield
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
A side-by-side breakdown of the architectural and economic trade-offs between the two leading data availability solutions.
01
Celestia's Edge: Sovereign Rollups
Architectural Primitive: Provides a minimal, purpose-built consensus and data availability layer. This enables sovereign rollups, where chains have full control over their execution and fork choice without relying on a smart contract bridge. This matters for projects prioritizing maximum sovereignty and minimal trust assumptions, like dYdX or Celo.
02
EigenDA's Edge: Ethereum Alignment
Native Restaking Security: Leverages Ethereum's validator set and economic security via EigenLayer restaking. This matters for protocols that require crypto-economic security derived directly from Ethereum and want to minimize validator fragmentation. Ideal for L2s like Mantle or Layer N that prioritize Ethereum's trust network.
03
Celestia's Trade-off: New Security Pool
Independent Validator Set: Security is bootstrapped separately from Ethereum, relying on its own token ($TIA) economics. While cost-effective, this presents a new trust assumption for rollups. This matters for teams who are comfortable with a modular security model distinct from Ethereum's established validator base.
04
EigenDA's Trade-off: Throughput & Cost
Throughput vs. Cost Scaling: While secure, data posting is processed by a subset of Ethereum operators, not the full set. Current throughput is high (10 MB/s target), but long-term cost scaling may be less aggressive than dedicated chains. This matters for ultra-high-throughput applications where marginal data cost is the primary constraint.
05
Choose Celestia For...
- Building a sovereign rollup or appchain (e.g., using Rollkit or Optimint).
- Minimizing data costs as the primary scaling driver.
- Projects that value chain-level sovereignty over deep Ethereum integration.
06
Choose EigenDA For...
- Ethereum-aligned L2s/Rollups (e.g., any EVM stack) seeking Ethereum's security halo.
- Protocols already integrated with EigenLayer's restaking ecosystem.
- Teams where minimizing new trust assumptions is more critical than the absolute lowest cost.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Celestia vs EigenDA: Data Availability Comparison
Direct comparison of core technical and economic metrics for modular data availability layers.
| Metric | Celestia | EigenDA |
|---|---|---|
Data Availability Cost (per MB) | $0.003 | $0.0005 |
Throughput (Blobs per Second) | ~40 | ~650 |
Security Model | Native Consensus | Restaking (Ethereum) |
Data Availability Sampling (DAS) | ||
Proof System | Celestia Fraud Proofs | EigenDA Attestations |
Mainnet Launch | Oct 2023 | Apr 2024 |
EVM Compatibility |
pros-cons-a
DATA AVAILABILITY LAYER COMPARISON
Celestia vs EigenDA: Modular DA Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs evaluating foundational infrastructure. Data based on mainnet performance and protocol design.
01
Celestia's Strength: First-Mover Ecosystem
Pioneering modular network: Live mainnet since 2023 with a $1B+ ecosystem. Supports rollups like Arbitrum Orbit, Optimism Stack, and Polygon CDK. This matters for teams prioritizing proven integrations and a wide range of ready-to-use tooling (Rollkit, Sovereign SDK).
50+
Active Rollups
$1B+
Ecosystem TVL
02
Celestia's Strength: Sovereign Rollup Design
Maximal sovereignty for chains: Enables rollups with their own governance and forkability, independent of a settlement layer. This matters for protocols requiring full control over their stack, like dYdX Chain and Eclipse, which use Celestia for data and execution.
03
Celestia's Trade-off: Cost Volatility
Fee market subject to TIA demand: Data blob fees are denominated in TIA and fluctuate with network usage and token price. This matters for budget-sensitive applications requiring predictable, stable operational costs, as seen in discussions among high-throughput gaming rollups.
04
EigenDA's Strength: Integrated Ethereum Security
Leverages Ethereum staking: Built as an AVS on EigenLayer, inheriting economic security from ~$15B in restaked ETH. This matters for teams who prioritize Ethereum-aligned security and want a DA layer that is a native extension of the Ethereum ecosystem.
$15B+
Restaked ETH TVL
05
EigenDA's Strength: Hyper-Scalable Throughput
Designed for massive scale: Targets 10 MB/s (vs. Celestia's ~1.5 MB/s) with plans for 100+ MB/s. This matters for ultra-high-throughput applications like hyper-scale social networks or order-book DEXs, as utilized by early adopters like Mantle and Celo.
06
EigenDA's Trade-off: Early-Stage & Centralization
Newer and more centralized: Launched in 2024 with a permissioned operator set (initially whitelisted). This matters for production systems requiring battle-tested, decentralized networks, as the operator set and cryptoeconomics are still maturing compared to Celestia's permissionless network.
pros-cons-b
CELESTIA VS EIGENDA
EigenDA: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for the two leading modular DA providers at a glance.
02
Celestia's Strength: Proven Throughput & Adoption
Market leader in production: First mover with mainnet live since 2023. Supports ~100 MB per block (theoretical) and is already used by major L2s like Manta Pacific and Arbitrum Orbit chains. This matters for protocols that prioritize battle-tested infrastructure and a large, existing developer ecosystem for tooling (Rollkit, Eclipse).
100+
Rollups Deployed
$1B+
Secured TVL
04
EigenDA's Strength: High Throughput & Low Cost
Optimized for high-volume, low-cost blobs: Built from the ground up for data availability, achieving 10-100 MB/s throughput with sub-cent costs. This matters for high-frequency applications like gaming or social feeds, and for rollups needing to scale data posting far beyond Ethereum's current blob capacity while maintaining a security link to Ethereum.
10 MB/s
Current Throughput
< $0.10
Per MB Cost (est.)
05
Celestia's Trade-off: New Security Model
Independent consensus layer: Security is based on Celestia's own validator set and token ($TIA). While robust, it does not directly inherit Ethereum's established security. This matters for risk-averse institutions or protocols that define security strictly as Ethereum's validator set. You are trusting a new, albeit large, cryptoeconomic system.
06
EigenDA's Trade-off: Ethereum Dependency & Complexity
Tightly coupled with Ethereum L1: Performance and cost are influenced by Ethereum's beacon chain and consensus. Introducing restaking complexity adds smart contract and slashing risks. This matters for teams seeking minimal operational overhead or maximum chain sovereignty. You are dependent on both Ethereum's and EigenLayer's continued health and governance.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Celestia for Cost & Scale
Verdict: The clear winner for maximizing throughput and minimizing data availability (DA) costs for high-volume, low-value transactions. Strengths:
- Lowest Cost per Byte: Pure data availability layer with no execution, leading to sub-cent costs for data blobs.
- Massive Scalability: Designed for horizontal scaling via data availability sampling (DAS), supporting 100+ MB blocks.
- Sovereignty: Rollups built on Celestia (e.g., Arbitrum Orbit, Optimism Stack) have full control over their execution and settlement. Ideal For: High-throughput appchains, gaming rollups, social media protocols, and any L2/L3 aiming for the lowest possible operational overhead.
EigenDA for Cost & Scale
Verdict: A strong, Ethereum-aligned alternative for projects prioritizing security over absolute lowest cost. Strengths:
- Ethereum Security: Inherits economic security from Ethereum restaking via EigenLayer, a major trust advantage.
- Competitive Pricing: Significantly cheaper than calldata, with costs tied to Ethereum's cryptoeconomic security.
- Integrated Ecosystem: Native compatibility with the Ethereum L2 stack (e.g., OP Stack, Arbitrum Nitro). Ideal For: Ethereum-aligned L2s (like Mantle, Celo) that want cheaper DA than calldata without a full security compromise.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A data-driven conclusion on selecting a modular DA layer based on your protocol's core requirements.
Celestia excels at providing a neutral, permissionless, and maximally decentralized data availability (DA) layer for sovereign rollups. Its core innovation is Data Availability Sampling (DAS), which allows light nodes to verify data availability without downloading all data, enabling high scalability. For example, its mainnet beta has demonstrated the capacity for 100+ MB blocks, translating to theoretical throughput far exceeding monolithic chains. This makes it the premier choice for new L2s and app-chains seeking foundational sovereignty and censorship resistance, as seen with adoption by networks like Arbitrum Orbit, Polygon CDK, and the broader Cosmos ecosystem.
EigenDA takes a different approach by being a high-throughput, low-cost DA layer secured by restaked ETH via EigenLayer. This strategy results in a significant trade-off: it leverages Ethereum's robust economic security (over $15B in TVL for EigenLayer) and deep integration with the EVM ecosystem, but introduces a new trust model based on actively validated services (AVSs). Its performance is optimized for cost, with projected costs ~100x cheaper than calldata on Ethereum L1, making it highly attractive for high-volume, cost-sensitive applications like gaming and social feeds that prioritize Ethereum-aligned security over maximal decentralization.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximal decentralization, neutrality, and building a sovereign execution environment, choose Celestia. It is the established standard for modular DA. If you prioritize deep Ethereum security integration, ultra-low costs for high-frequency data, and leveraging the existing ETH staker ecosystem, choose EigenDA. For CTOs, the decision matrix is clear: Celestia for foundational chain infrastructure; EigenDA for cost-optimized, Ethereum-centric dApps and rollups like Mantle and Celo that are already live.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall